MLB: Chicago Cubs Offseason Hot Stove

ISUCubswin

Well-Known Member
Mar 3, 2011
24,201
7,102
113
My Playhouse
Hammel just seems like a waste of $10 million a year unless we feel Lester is out or we plan on trading a pitcher.

Pick 5: Lester, Hammels, Arrieta, Wood, Wada, Turner, Edwards, Hendricks, Dubront.

Not a bad problem to have, but we could've done better, IMO.
 

Fitzy

Tracer Bullet
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Apr 8, 2014
8,332
4,290
113
La La Land
The Cubs should honestly be selling the possibility of becoming a legend to these free agent pitchers... Anyone on the team when they finally break through and win a Series will be remembered for a long, long time. More so than any other team they'd win a Series with.
 

ISUCubswin

Well-Known Member
Mar 3, 2011
24,201
7,102
113
My Playhouse
The Cubs should honestly be selling the possibility of becoming a legend to these free agent pitchers... Anyone on the team when they finally break through and win a Series will be remembered for a long, long time. More so than any other team they'd win a Series with.

This. BUT, it's widely known the Cubs want Price and Price wants the Cubs so Lester probably knows if he comes to Chicago he'll only be the ace for a year.
 

Clonefan32

Well-Known Member
Nov 19, 2008
23,349
25,646
113
I read somewhere that when you take income tax into account he would need to make approximately 11.5 million more during the course of a 6 year deal in San Fran rather than Chicago to even out the deals.
 

tm3308

Well-Known Member
Jun 13, 2010
8,185
1,607
113
This. BUT, it's widely known the Cubs want Price and Price wants the Cubs so Lester probably knows if he comes to Chicago he'll only be the ace for a year.

As opposed to going to San Francisco (Bumgarner), LA (Kershaw), or New York (Tanaka)? The only place he can go and be THE ace for more than a year is Boston. Chicago is the only other destination where he'd be THE ace for even that long.
 

KnappShack

Well-Known Member
May 26, 2008
23,535
31,717
113
Parts Unknown
I read somewhere that when you take income tax into account he would need to make approximately 11.5 million more during the course of a 6 year deal in San Fran rather than Chicago to even out the deals.
I have a hard time believing tax in California and Illinois are that different.

Now Texas vs Illinois or California. Maybe. For those 81 home games played in Texas there'd be zero income tax
 

Clonefan32

Well-Known Member
Nov 19, 2008
23,349
25,646
113
I have a hard time believing tax in California and Illinois are that different.

Now Texas vs Illinois or California. Maybe. For those 81 home games played in Texas there'd be zero income tax

Bu8-THdIIAEict9.jpg
 

Clonefan94

Well-Known Member
Oct 18, 2006
11,166
6,175
113
Schaumburg, IL
I have a hard time believing tax in California and Illinois are that different.

Now Texas vs Illinois or California. Maybe. For those 81 home games played in Texas there'd be zero income tax

Illinois income tax isn't that bad at all. It's part of the reason we have so many problems with the state budget. Property taxes aren't very good though, at least around the Chicago area, but compared to San Fran and just property prices in general, Chicago is a bargain.

EDIT: Woops, sorry, noticed a tax map was posted above me.
 

KnappShack

Well-Known Member
May 26, 2008
23,535
31,717
113
Parts Unknown
I'm looking at that tax map and I STILL can't get my head around those numbers.

But seriously....why doesn't Texas and Florida have better luck in the sports world. They have a baked in advantage with the lack of state income tax.